While I know that most here are British, Scottish, Welsh, or Irish by birth, Ivan and I decided to include this little corner for those who might be curious about life in the US ... or at least, my version of it. This isn't going to be a diary. You won't learn about what I had for breakfast or who I have a crush on by reading here. I know, I know ... I'm sure you were all dying to know, but you'll have to read the tabloids to get that kind of information.

Instead, I plan to just post my random thoughts, opinions, stories I hear, and perhaps the occasional anecdote if I feel it has a point worth mentioning. Of course people are free to comment or PM if they so desire. Some may be specific to the US, others may simply be observations about people in general, which may highlight both our commonalities and our differences as two different cultures.

Given my medical conditions, I have a lot of time on my hands - time I often spend doing various kinds of research which includes watching YouTube videos. It is one way I keep an eye on the other side of the political spectrum. Earlier today, I browsed to a 1.5 hour-long video about the End TImes, something many Americans seem to be fascinated with. One cannot watch a documentary on astronomy or cosmology without it somehow coming back to how the universe can kill us. Personally I tire how how apocalyptic images gets big ratings for the networks - does everyone hate life so much that they can't wait until the next gamma ray burst, black hole, supernovae, asteroid impact, rogue red dwarf star, or Planet X/Nibiru wipes us all out?

But I digress. This video, presented by John van Impe and his wife, immediately launched into a tirade about how Obama is the anti-Christ - which is just plain ridiculous all by itself. According to the Bible, the anti-Christ will be an oratory genius, straight out of van Impe's own mouth, yet every conservative knows Obama can't speak intelligibly without a teleprompter. The Bible says the anti-Christ will be a commercial genius - except every conservative knows that NONE of Obama's economic plans have worked. The Bible says the anti-Christ will be a political genius - except Obama has been the most divisive president in modern US history, something both sides know and understand. I mean, seriously, do I need to keep running down the list?

Yet it isn't the content of these inane videos that I really want to address - even if these videos are poisoning the minds of a nation already ruled by superstition and fear. What I want to address is the self-imposed fascism that I have begun to notice more and more. I read the comments below the video and saw a virtual cesspool of religious nonsense, the usual delusion of how Christ's return is so close that he was picked up on radar over the North Pole. You know how that goes. Every generation of zealots believes Christ will return during their lifetime. Never mind that they've been saying this since the fall of Rome.

Oops, I digressed again. So ... onward to where the fascism comes into play. Naturally, with all the religious fanaticism taking place, I couldn't resist dropping a few pebbles into their otherwise placid little pond. Commenting on YouTube videos is rather difficult - with only 350 or so characters to work with, one cannot truly express complex ideas. But I managed to write up a tidy and concise response with characters to spare. But when I hit the "post" button, an unusual thing occurred:Now, since when do video uploaders approve the comments? I've seen plenty of people who disabled comments altogether, but never one where some comments were allowed and others were not. Oh wait, yes I did. Just a few days ago I watched another YouTube video clip of Reagan's goodbye speech when he left office. Naturally, the comments amounted to a viper's nest of conservatives bashing liberals and hailing Reagan as the next best thing to the Second Coming. I went to post a comment there, as well, only to get slammed with ... you guessed it ... "Comment Pending Approval." Naturally, it wasn't approved.

This is becoming quite common. On another forum called Sodahead, I was consistently blocked and ignored by conservatives. In fact, they loved to take a cheap shot at me and then gag me to prevent my response. On some topics, I was blocked from posting at all ... and these topics, as one can deduce, focused on bashing Obama and liberals. It seems everywhere I go now, conservatives are doing their utmost to squelch the liberal voice ... it is a self-imposed fascism, a fascism not enforced by the government but by the people themselves. It's almost as if these conservatives are getting a jump-start on censorship, one of the hallmarks of a fascist state. If the government won't silence those pesky liberals, WE will!

Imagine a standard Napoleonic battlefield with two armies staring at each other across a line drawn in the sand. Sometimes the liberals invade the conservatives, sometimes the conservatives invade the liberals. Now, however, the conservatives are building a wall of censorship so that the liberals can no longer invade. The trouble is: liberals don't believe in censorship. Thus, if you watch pro-liberal, pro-left, pro-progressive videos, you won't be faced with a "Comment Pending Approval" message. Nor will you be blocked or ignored wholesale on liberal topics on various forums. The result is that conservatives can invade our space and plaster their insanity all over the internet. But when liberals try to fight back, we find ourselves censored and blocked, unable to give our voice to their bash-fests. In other words, liberals are forced into a defensive fight, unable to voice our opinions on conservative-dominated topics and forums.

Conservatives no longer wish to debate the issues, they just want to shut us up.

I've decided to use this space for something a little bit different -- an ongoing tally of insane, stupid, fascist, and otherwise dumb things members of the GOP have said in the last few years. Given the ever-increasing numbers of such events, would be remiss if I did not keep a running record of this idiocy lest we forget just how asinine they can be. Oh, and I've challenged the opposition to come up with equally stupid things the Democrats have said ... and I don't mean verbal typos like Obama saying "57 states." I mean really BIG examples of buffoonery like the ones I'm about to present. Most of them you've heard before, but nowhere are they gathered in one convenient place. Check back here from time to time as I'm sure this list will keep growing ... and growing. And growing.

Rape is only really rape if it involves force. So says the new House Republican majority as it now moves to change abortion law.

For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. (Another exemption covers pregnancies that could endanger the life of the woman.) But the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," a bill with 173 mostly Republican co-sponsors that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has dubbed a top priority in the new Congress, contains a provision that would rewrite the rules to limit drastically the definition of rape and incest in these cases.

With this legislation, which was introduced last week by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), Republicans propose that the rape exemption be limited to "forcible rape." This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible. For example: If a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion. (Smith's spokesman did not respond to a call and an email requesting comment.)

NH GOP State Congressman Says Disabled and Mentally Ill Are ‘Defective People’ And Should Be Shipped To Siberia

A community health program manager got a surprise when she e-mailed her NH State Congressman recently to ask him about why he had voted to cut money from mental health programs. The Senator told her that society would be better without disabled people, and he wishes he could ship disabled people to Siberia.

Barrington Republican Martin Harty told Sharon Omand, a Strafford resident who manages a community mental health program, that “the world is too populated” and there are “too many defective people,” according to an e-mail account of the conversation by Omand. Asked what he meant, she said Harty clarified, “You know the mentally ill, the retarded, people with physical disabilities and drug addictions – the defective people society would be better off without.”

Omand says Harty then stated, “I wish we had a Siberia so we could ship them all off to freeze to death and die and clean up the population.”

Republican Candidate In Arkansas Says Parents Should Seek Death Penalty Against ‘Rebellious Children’

A candidate for the Arkansas legislature, Charlie Fuqua, says children who don’t demonstrate “respect for parents” should be put to death, the Arkansas Times reports. Fuqua is a former member of the Arkansas legislature and has received support from the Arkansas Republican Party and two sitting members of Congress.

Here’s the key passage from Fuqua’s 2012 book, “God’s Law: The Only Political Solution“:

The maintenance of civil order in society rests on the foundation of family discipline. Therefore, a child who disrespects his parents must be permanently removed from society in a way that gives an example to all other children of the importance of respect for parents. The death penalty for rebellious children is not something to be taken lightly. The guidelines for administering the death penalty to rebellious children are given in Deut 21:18-21:

Fuqua helpfully notes that “This passage does not give parents blanket authority to kill their children.” Rather, parents would have to “follow the proper procedure in order to have the death penalty executed against their children.” Fuqua assures the reader that, in his view, the procedure would “rarely be used.” The threat of death would, however, “be a tremendous incentive for children to give proper respect to their parents.’

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — In an effort to explain his stance on abortion, Representative Todd Akin, the Republican Senate nominee from Missouri, provoked ire across the political spectrum on Sunday by saying that in instances of what he called “legitimate rape,” women’s bodies somehow blocked an unwanted pregnancy.

Asked in an interview on a St. Louis television station about his views on abortion, Mr. Akin, a six-term member of Congress who is backed by Tea Party conservatives, made it clear that his opposition to the practice was nearly absolute, even in instances of rape.

“It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare,” Mr. Akin said of pregnancies from rape. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something: I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.”

ATHENS, Ga.—Georgia Rep. Paul Broun said in videotaped remarks that evolution, embryology and the Big Bang theory are "lies straight from the pit of hell" meant to convince people that they do not need a savior.

The Republican lawmaker made those comments during a speech Sept. 27 at a sportsman's banquet at Liberty Baptist Church in Hartwell. Broun, a medical doctor, is running for re-election in November unopposed by Democrats.

"God's word is true," Broun said, according to a video posted on the church's website. "I've come to understand that. All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and Big Bang theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of hell. And it's lies to try to keep me and all the folks who are taught that from understanding that they need a savior."

Broun also said that he believes the Earth is about 9,000 years old and that it was made in six days. Those beliefs are held by fundamentalist Christians who believe the creation accounts in the Bible to be literally true.

Broun spokeswoman Meredith Griffanti told the Athens Banner-Herald ( bit.ly Us4O0Z) that Broun was recorded speaking off-the-record to a church group about his religious beliefs. He sits on the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

It seems unlikely that Broun's remarks were supposed to be kept private. The banquet was advertised, Broun spoke before an audience and the video of his remarks was posted on the church's website.

Some of Arkansas’ Republican legislators are radical extremists whose views are far outside the mainstream of Arkansas.

I’ve written previously about State Rep. Loy Mauch’s radical beliefs, now it’s time to examine the extremism of another Republican state legislator – Jon Hubbard.

Republican State Rep. Jon Hubbard published a book entitled, “Letters to the Editor: Confessions of a Frustrated Conservative,” and using highly sophisticated oppo research skills that Republicans complain about, I read some of what he wrote. What Jon Hubbard writes and believes will blow your hair back.

From reading Hubbard’s writings, it is clear he believes that African-Americans are lazy, ignorant, lack discipline and that they should be thankful they were once enslaved. My previous sentence is inflammatory, but that is what Hubbard has basically written in his book. And by the end of this post you’ll believe I even held back a little.

Let’s start looking at the extreme words Hubbard put to paper.

First, Hubbard believes that slavery was, in the end, a good thing for African-Americans:

“… the institution of slavery that the black race has long believed to be an abomination upon its people may actually have been a blessing in disguise. The blacks who could endure those conditions and circumstances would someday be rewarded with citizenship in the greatest nation ever established upon the face of the Earth.” (Pages 183-89)

Here is what Hubbard is really saying: Hey black folks, yeah, I know, we kept you in chains for hundreds of years, beat you, raped your women, lynched innocent teenagers, destroyed your families, but isn’t that really a good thing?

Hubbard believes integrating schools is harmful to white students because, in his opinion, blacks are lazy, have no discipline and are causing a decline in education:

“… one of the stated purposes of school integration was to bring black students up to a level close to that of white students. But, to the great disappointment of everyone, the results of this theory worked exactly in reverse of its intended purpose, and instead of black students rising to the educational levels previously attained by white students, the white students dropped to the level of black students. To make matters worse the lack of discipline and ambition of black students soon became shared by their white classmates, and our educational system has been in a steady decline ever since.” (Page 27)

Hubbard believes blacks are too ignorant to know the value of a good education:

“Wouldn’t life for blacks in America today be more enjoyable and successful if they would only learn to appreciate the value of a good education?” (Page 184)

Hubbard believes black folks were lucky they were once enslaved because living in Africa is bad:

African Americans must “understand that even while in the throes of slavery, their lives as Americans are likely much better than they ever would have enjoyed living in sub-Saharan Africa.”

“Knowing what we know today about life on the African continent, would an existence spent in slavery have been any crueler than a life spent in sub-Saharan Africa?” (Pages 93 and 189)

Here is where Hubbard basically says black folks are lazy and don’t do anything worthwhile:

“… will it ever become possible for black people in the United States of America to firmly establish themselves as inclusive and contributing members of society within this country?” (Page 187)

It blows my mind that this man is an elected state representative. Are the above views shared by others in the Republican legislative caucus? Have any Republican legislators ever denounced Hubbard from writing straight-out racist statements? Is this representative of the Republican Party of Arkansas reflective of the party’s attitude toward African-American Arkansans? Will they condemn this intolerance and ignorant attitude? Silence will speak volumes.

I doubt folks in Craighead County had any idea about Hubbard’s core beliefs in 2010 when they first elected him. Harold Copenhaver is running against this condescending, clueless and yes, I’ll say it, racist incumbent and hopefully the Democratic challenger is getting the word out about the extremist Jon Hubbard.

Loy Mauch is the latest Republican member of the Arkansas House of Representatives found to have written letters in support of slavery.

According to reports from the Arkansas Times, Mauch defended slavery in one of his letters to the editor of the Arkansas Democrat Gazette in 2009, saying:

“If slavery were so God-awful, why didn’t Jesus or Paul condemn it, why was it in the Constitution and why wasn’t there a war before 1861? The South has always stood by the Constitution and limited government. When one attacks the Confederate Battle Flag, he is certainly denouncing these principles of government as well as Christianity.”

The former Sons of the Confederate Veterans chapter leader’s letters to the editor did not stop at his strong support for the slavery and the Confederate South. He also fashioned attacks against Abraham Lincoln, calling the 16th president a “fake neurotic Northern war criminal” while comparing him to Karl Marx.

While the American Family Association claims that one of its founding objectives is to defend “the rights of conscience and religious liberty from infringement by government,” its chief spokesman Bryan Fischer continues to show his contempt for religious freedom. Fischer, the AFA’s Director of Issues Analysis, repeatedly demanded that the US deport all Muslims and prohibit and purge Muslims from the military, and also called for the banning and destruction of mosques. Fischer today attempted to reconcile his ardent opposition to Muslim religious liberty with the Constitution’s First Amendment by claiming that the Constitution actually doesn’t apply to or protect Muslims at all:

"Islam has no fundamental First Amendment claims, for the simple reason that it was not written to protect the religion of Islam. Islam is entitled only to the religious liberty we extend to it out of courtesy. While there certainly ought to be a presumption of religious liberty for non-Christian religious traditions in America, the Founders were not writing a suicide pact when they wrote the First Amendment."

A thoughtful, sensitive male Wisconsin legislator has proclaimed that he is against divorce under all circumstances — even spousal abuse. And he's got a message to all those ladies out there getting the shit beaten out of them by their husbands: remember the good times, back before things took an abusive turn, and maybe you'll fall in love again. There, isn't that better? Now, chin up, and go back out into that awful marriage of yours like a champ.

The obtuse anti divorce champion is Republican Don Pridemore. And this isn't the first time the Heartless Cheesehead has acted in a manner most unbecoming.

Remember earlier this month when another Wisconsin lawmaker thoughtfully suggested that maybe single parenthood should be considered a factor that may be indicative of child abuse? Pridemore was a co-sponsor of the bill that would've made it a crime for a person to dare try to raise a child on their own outside of the pillowy soft Magic Zone of marriage. But what about women who are being abused by their husbands? Shouldn't they have the option to extract themselves from an unhealthy situation? Nope, says Pridemore. And he's got some expert abused spouse marital advice as well: "If they can refind those reasons and get back to why they got married in the first place it might help."

Fischer: Government Should Mandate that Everyone Attend Church and Tax Those Who Don't

Inspired by a suggestion from a listener, Bryan Fischer hit upon a brilliant idea on yesterday's radio program: using health care reform to mandate that everyone attend church and assess a tax on all those who don't.

As Fischer explained, "people who have an active, vibrant spiritual life are healthier" and since "Obamacare is all about improving the health of the American people," we ought to "mandate that you go to church for your own health and we are going to tax the atheists who don't go to church":

Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said pregnancies resulting from rape are part of God’s plan, tearfully explaining that he only supports abortions when a mother’s life is in danger.

“I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen,” Mourdock said during Tuesday’s Senate debate, choking up. Mourdock’s opponent, Democratic Rep. Joe Donnelly, opposes abortion except in cases of rape and incest.

Amid ongoing controversy surrounding Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock's comments about pregnancies resulting from rape, the Romney campaign said today it will stand by the candidate, even while Mitt Romney "disagrees" with him regarding abortion policy.

Mourdock, a Tea Party-backed candidate who beat longtime moderate Sen. Richard Lugar in the state's Republican nominating contest earlier this year, came under fire from the left last night after suggesting that pregnancies resulting from rape are "something that God intended to happen."

It gives me great sadness to announce that I am now living in one of the most right-wing Republican areas of the United States. This is reflected in many opinion pieces found in the local, small-town newspapers, and I thought this would be the perfect place to share some of the stupidity (teehee!) with the forum. My own commentary is the non-italicized portion of the post.

A note on copyright issues. Opinion pieces submitted by members of the community who are NOT employed as writers by the newspaper do not have the same measure of intellectual property protection since these authors are not getting paid for their work. In essence, there is nothing to "steal" from them and reproducing the letters here would be no different than if I copied someone else's forum post. As long as the author's name is cited and I do not take credit for the piece (gods, why would I want to?!?), legally, the articles are subject to "fair use" laws which includes the right to use these articles in a forum debate and discussion.

So, without further ado, let's look at our first letter (*chuckle*)

Government is getting bigger - and worse authored by Tim Sneeringer of West Hickory, PA

"The other day I paid almost $9 for a priority package to be sent to eastern Pennsylvania. Five days later the package wasn't received so I checked at the post office to see where it was. The package was sent to Kansas City where it sat for three days before being sent back to Pennsylvania. No wonder the United States Postal Service is losing money."

Apparently this author never had a clue how the post office works. Packages are ALWAYS sent to a distribution hub, sorted with other packages with the same regional destinations, then the packages are sent back to local post offices where they are delivered. If the post office took every package directly from one mailbox to the next, it would take months to get a package. I guess they never bothered to track a package they've ordered from, say, Amazon ... because if they had, they'd see their packages landing in all kinds of different cities. And those are the private companies like FedEx and UPS.

At any rate, the post office is losing money because the Republicans don't want to spend money on it and figure that the private companies can usurp the role of the US Postal Service. It goes back to the right-wing belief that ANYONE who works for the government is just a fat cat leech living on taxpayer money while doing nothing but eating cheese puffs in their cushy offices.

"I am also currently dealing with the IRS with no success. I have to do what is called "income verification" for my two kids who are in college. I've done the income verification in the past for my older son with no problems. This year, however, the college can no longer accept a copy of my tax return so now I must get a tax return transcript directly from the IRS. I have tried more than 30 times by phone, Internet, and through student financial aid to get my transcript with no luck from the IRS. Starting this year the IRS will be in charge of Obamacare. God help us!"

Yes, God help us because the author capitalized the "I" in "Internet." I guess the lesson on proper nouns was one the author snoozed his way through.

Now, granted, wading through bureaucracies can be maddening, but this author must have lived a sheltered life if he has never had to deal with corporate bureaucracy -- which often puts government bureaucracy to shame in regards to customer service. At least the government isn't outsourcing customer service to India so that half the battle of problem resolution is simply understanding the accent of the person on the other end.

"Who will save us from our federal government?"

Well, I don't know. The Chinese? The Taliban? Certainly not those Pinko Socialist Europeans! It never ceases to amaze me how many Americans whine and rail against our government yet they never seem to have a better alternative.

"Our government is getting bigger, more powerful, less effective and efficient and spending more of our tax money."

LOL! The government is spending more of our tax money, is it? Well ... what ELSE does a government, ANY government, do with TAX money?

"The federal government will take in more tax money in 2013 than it ever has in our history. What do we have to show for our government spending?"

Oh, oh, that's easy. We have two invasions, two protracted wars, at least one military incursion (Libya), a possible second on the way (Syria), and a massive expenditure on defense. But wait! Keep note of how this author NEVER mentions our bloated defense budget ... wait and see what he DOES mention.

"Our infrastructure is in terrible condition with crumbling roads and bridges and old water and sewage plants."

Yep, I agree 100%, except I'm willing to bet the farm that this guy is a conservative Republican. I'll make that bet because the primary reason why our infrastructure is crumbling is because a) Republicans piss and moan about taxes and don't want to pay them and b) the Republican-controlled House blocked all of the transportation and infrastructure bills Obama tried to pass -- including a bill that has been passed every single year since the Eisenhower administration. Keep in mind that the so-called Tea Party is all about lowering taxes or not paying them at all. So how on God's green earth can we fund maintainance on our infrastructure if Republicans ... *gasp* ... don't want to pay for it? I guess they're waiting for the road and bridge fairies to arrive in the middle of the night and fix everything for free.

So why do I think the author is a conservative Republican? It's because whenever the Republican party does something stupid (like refuse to fund bridge and highway maintenance), and whenever the Republican constituents KNOW that it was stupid, they just blame the government. Yeah, the anonymous government. They don't want to call their own party to the carpet for its stupidity, so they pretend the whole government is the problem and not specifically the Republican party. How typical and predictable.

"However, we do have a record number of Americans on welfare and receiving food stamps."

Haha! And here we go. Blame the poor. Yeah, it's all that safety net money that's the cause of it all! Like I said, note how this author never mentioned the bloated military budget, the useless war in Iraq, etc. As per usual, these assclowns go straight for the throat of the poor. They ALWAYS do. Thanks Fox News and Rush Limbaugh for turning the country against itself.

"We are a great country and nation and even with our problems I would never want to live anywhere else."

Wha, really? America is a "great country and nation" is it?

And my vehicle is a really great car and automobile. Thanks for that insight, Captain Redundancy. I really wish you WOULD live somewhere else.

"In the last week or so I have noticed something in a couple of articles in the newspaper that disturbs me. God's name was written beginning with the lowercase 'g'"

Wow, now THAT's disturbing! When I read all of those lowercase 'g's' when referring to G(g)od, I could barely hold on to the paper I was so weak with shock and disgust! Never mind the other stories in the newspaper such as the never-ending parade of sex predators, local industries like Joy and GE laying off people by the dozens, county officials stealing or misallocating taxpayer money, a possible war with Syria, and the standard array of murders. No, forget those. How can anyone care about THOSE things when people are spelling G(g)od with a small 'g'?

"Referring to God, a capital letter should be used when writing his name because of who he is. He is God almighty, creator of heaven and all that is therein."

I might not have been so harsh with this letter if the author had simply said it was grammatically incorrect to refer to God with a small 'g' because "God" is considered to be his proper name. Okay, I could have bought into that idea. But nooo! Forget grammar, we have to capitalize God's name because he's God.

Bullshit. You see, this is precisely the reason why many atheists refuse to spell God's name with a capital letter. We often feel that by spelling his name with an uppercase 'G' atheists are giving credence to the idea that God actually exists and really is the "creator of heaven and all that is therein." Using a lowercase 'g' is simply a way non-believers show their lack of belief and we are not obligated to capitalize his so-called name (which isn't "God" by the way). To suggest, as this author does, that we all must show both respect for and acknowledgement of God by using a capital letter is an infringement of our 1st Amendment Constitutional rights.

"Many blame the influence of Madalyn Murray O'Hair for prayer and Bible reading being removed from public schools. That may be so, but it started when we got too busy with other things and didn't teach our children about Jesus and the Bible."

First of all, students can still read the Bible and pray in school until their tongues falls out if they want to. The problem with these religious nutjobs is that they want Christianity forced, that's right, FORCED onto our children through the use of teacher-led Christian prayers chanted in unison by the students during class time. In a country where even the smallest towns have a church on every street corner (I live in a town with 400 people and there are no less than five churches in town and another six in the outlying areas), it isn't all that hard to send your kids to church if you want to indoctrinate them so badly. You don't need the public schools to start doing it, too.

Secondly, "we got too busy doing other things"? Oh, you mean like actually living life free of being afraid of invisible, non-existent entities? It didn't "start" with parents not teaching their kids about Jesus and the Bible. It "started" when parents stopped parenting. It started when it took two incomes to raise a family. It started when parents had to spend 60 hours per week at work just to make ends meet. It started when children began being treated like pests, mosquitos, and nuisances. I could go on. Jesus and the Bible had absolutely NOTHING to do with it. After all, how DID those pre-Christian civilizations EVER get by without the good ole Bible to help them along?

Oh, and I'm betting my bottom dollar that neither parents or churches spend a lot of time talking about those two she-bears and the 42 dead kids. I do remember through my own experiences in Sunday School how much Christians just adore celebrating the genocide of humanity via the Great Flood. I remember the confusion I personally felt when I first learned about the Jewish genocide during the Holocaust and thought ... wait a minute ... why is everyone so upset with Hitler for committing genocide when Christians think God doing it was a really keen thing to do? *boggle*

"If we all in America would take time to read a chapter in the Bible a day, I know we would have a better America."

Hmm, perhaps. Because if more people actually read the Bible, I'm willing to wager the number of atheists would soar. Many atheists were "born" due to reading that depraved and nonsensical book and I'm certain, at least among the thinkers in our nation, that many more would throw away their primitive superstitions for enlightenment if they actually read that horrific tome from cover to cover.

Yet notice something else. Notice how this author has no interest in maintaining America's diversity. Yes, wouldn't America be a better place if we all did what he does, if we all read the Bible and became Christians, if we all wore the same clothes, listened to the same music, read the same books, and held the same political opinions? Wouldn't life be SOO much easier if we were all clones and drones in the Christian (Borg?) Collective? This seems to be a popular opinion among religious zealots -- that their nations and, indeed, the world would be a better place if we all adopted facsism (which religion inherently supports) and did what we're told. Of course, no one can say which of those Biblical chapters people will take to heart. Will it be the "do unto others" sermon or will it be like a certain Southern congressman's opinion that we should murder rebellious children as per Deuteronomy?

"We say and sing God Bless America. If we want God to bless us, we should bless him."

Why, did God sneeze or something?

I never really understood this need to worship. It's as alien to me as if I came from another planet to study human customs. Why would this all-powerful God need to have his ego stroked by we insignifcant, puny, sinful beings? It seems no matter how perfect, how good, how loving the gods are that we invent, they all share one thing (among others) in common: the need for constant praise, like a little child always in need of emotional support. It makes no sense to me.

"Be grateful to him. He has given us many blessings each day of our lives."

Oh he has, has he? I don't think so. However, I think we've run far afield of a letter instructing everyone to use an uppercase 'G' when referring to God. Notice how Christians can never resist the opportunity to prosyletize and preach if given an open microphone. And here it comes ....

"I leave you with this thought, commit your life to him and serve him daily with all your heart. Your retirement will be out of this world."

I guess using a capital 'G' is part and parcel of "committing your life to him." I just can't fathom American Christians who spout off about freedom every chance they get yet worship an authoritarian and dictatorial God while championing authoritarian and dictatorial corporations. It just makes no sense. Again.

Scott Lively is a hero to some, a demon to others and a joke to still more. From his home in Springfield, Mass., he runs Abiding Truth Ministries, a church dedicated to combating “the homosexual agenda,” and Holy Grounds Coffee Shop, where the faithful gather for java and Jesus. Lively also sermonizes overseas, promoting his books — most notably The Pink Swastika, which traces the Nazi Party to a gay bar — and portraying gay love as a “dark force” in human history responsible for the Inquisition, American slavery and the Holocaust.

On his blog this month, Lively praised Putin as “the defender of Christian civilization” for signing this summer a ban on information that treats being gay as valid or attractive — and traced the idea to his own tour of Russia in 2006-7. Last week, Lively suggested Russian officials foil gay activists planning to rainbow-bomb the Olympics by flying a rainbow banner over the games so “the global homosexual movement” would be reminded that “the rainbow belongs to God!”

In Moldova in 2011, according to Human Rights Watch, he helped several cities declare themselves “gay-free zones” and organized an “emergency” campaign to block a law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. In Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Ukraine and Belarus he met with politicians and pastors, fostering talk of new curbs on gay rights. Every place he goes, Lively says, his goal is to block the open expression of homosexuality, keep discrimination legal and make pro-gay advocacy a crime.

To whip up support for such policies, Lively simply shares his beliefs about gay people: They’re dangerous predators, even killers. And they caught this gay “disorder” through “an evil game of tag,” a chain of abuse in which gays recruit kids into sodomy just as they were once recruited. In this way homosexuality spreads like “a social cancer,” he claims, until nothing remains of the Christian world.

It's time for an amendment convention in the states -- authored by Christopher Packer of Corsica, Pennyslvania

"How many of you trust the government? I, for one, do not."

Oh boy, here we go -- yet another rant about the government. Even before I read the rest of this letter, I figured this was another conservative due to him blaming the government in general rather than the Tea Party Republicans who are so flagrantly gumming up the gears of government.

"Our founders placed limits on government, and they have been shattered. Neither political party is willing to return to those limits."

I've said it a thousand times: The Founders wrote their famous documents at the end of the 18th Century, for crying out loud! What year is it now? Let me check ... oh, right, it's 2013. We're in the 21st Century! The Constitution cannot be carved into stone, immutable and unchangeable. Nor did the Founders foresee things like a monolithic health care industry that sucked the resources of the people dry. Nor did they foresee a nation that would spend more on defense than the next 19 nations combined. They didn't foresee social issues like abortion, gay marriage, women's reproduction rights, stem cell research, etc. so how could they regulate these issues in the Constitution?

Oh, and one other thing. I am really SICK of states' rights. There, I said it. I would probably be strung up from the highest tree if a Tea Partier heard me, but I don't care. Right now, the governor of my state, Pennsylvania, refuses to expand Medicaid coverage ... and that means I will get jack shit from Obamacare. I will not qualify for even the tiniest bit of help. The paper just yesterday declared that many childless adults earning less than $11,000 per year will not be eligible for either Medicaid OR tax credits. So yeah, the people who need the help the most are the ones taking it right up the ass.

What does this have to do with states' rights? Well, it's because each state is allowed to decide for itself whether or not to expand Medicaid. WHY? I mean, what the hell are poor people supposed to do if their state decides not to expand it? Just up sticks and move? Because, you know, sick people enjoy moving to a strange state where they have no support network. If the federal government mandated that ALL states expand their coverage, then all poor people would receive health care, and we would actually feel like a real nation instead of a collection of fiefdoms.

"Both parties refuse to limit spending. Watch what happens with the debt limit debate. The Democrats will demand an increase and the Republicans will end up caving as they always do."

Wow, I can only assume this guy just crawled out of the bomb shelter he has been living in since 1955. Republicans caving? Seriously? The Republicans are NOT caving, and that is the single most destructive aspect of the government right now. Even moderate Republicans are starting to complain about their more radical brethren. The uber right-wing Republicans have tried, often successfully, to block every bill Obama has tried to pass, meaning nothing gets done. Caving? Heh. Perhaps if they did cave once in awhile, government would actually be effective.

"If you or I max out our credit card, are we allowed to just decide that we will increase the limit placed on us? Government doesn't care about limits, because they aren't spending their money. They are spending our money, and they look at us as an endless supply of cash."

First of all, once the government collects taxes, it becomes the government's money. It is no longer "our" money. If the general population was allowed to micromanage tax expenditures then nothing whatsoever would get done, and everything would be underfunded.

Secondly, the United States is the third most populous country in the world and the fourth largest nation by land area. In addition, much of America is inhabited and developed - unlike Canada and Russia which have vast swathes of uninhabited tundra and arctic wasteland. Now, with that in mind, America is also a 1st World nation with a high standard of living, something many here (including this author) takes for granted. Having such a large, populated, developed 1st World nation means lots 'o miles of electrical wire; lots 'o miles of water pipes and sewage drains; lots 'o miles of streets, roads, and interstates. It means lots 'o schools and universities; it means lots 'o libraries, museums, hospitals, clinics, and convention centers. It means having a strong and technologically advanced military to protect US interests at home and abroad. It means lots and lots 'o people who need all kinds of government services from Social Security to Disability to Welfare.

Therefore, it is a ridicuolous analogy, comparing the government of the USA to someone's personal debit card. Maintaining and improving upon such a large and populous country such as America is expensive. Very, very expensive. So much so, in fact, that if it wasn't for America's vast economy, we would not be a 1st World nation. It would have been virtually impossible to cover the entirety of the USA with an electrical grid, a water and sewage system, etc. Pockets of people here would be living like 3rd World thralls.

All I can say to the author, Mr. Packer, is that if he enjoys the benefits, convenience, and comfort of living in a 1st World nation, we, as citizens, must PAY for it. We can't simply stop spending when some invisible economic barrier is reached because that would spell the end of 1st World status. If he wants to point a finger at someone, it should be those who continue demanding ever larger sums of money from the government in order to complete contracts. Since America IS a capitalist nation, the USA does not own factories and offices nor does it hire road working crews, electricians, and engineers. The government must contract with a private industry -- even our military machines are built by private defense contractors. So, instead of whining about how much the government spends, perhaps this author should ask WHY prices have gotten so high that even mighty America can no longer afford to pay them.

"The government spies on us through the NSA, and the president has the nerve to appear on Jay Leno (Aug. 6) and claim there is no domestic spying. It's been revealed that the NSA violates privacy rights thousands of times a year."

I've always found it quaint and naive how so many Americans actually believe that the president knows everything that goes on within the halls of power. Heh, it's a laugh riot that people still believe this. Our intelligence agencies have always been somewhat rogueish, doing things that the government (Congress and the President) have no idea are even taking place. The president does NOT know about every "black project," or secret weapon, or special op unfolding in some remote part of the world. I doubt Obama knew anything about the NSA spying on people -- hell, I'm betting the NSA was spying on Obama! But that's what agencies like the NSA does -- they spy. And if they cannot do their jobs within the USA, then all a terrorist has to do is get to America because, once here, he would be safe from detection.

"Corporate mandates were to take effect for Obamacare beginning in 2014. What does Obama do? He just comes out and arbitrarily rewrites the law putting off the mandate until 2015."

It wasn't "arbitrary," Mr. Packer. The mandates were stalled for a year thanks to the ... wait for it ... yeah, the damned Tea Party. Now, moderate Republicans are screaming at other Republicans saying, "Stop appeasing the Tea Party!" Because the Tea Party does not represent the majority of Americans AND their policies and ideologies will result in the slow, painful death of the Republican party. Don't blame Obama, blame the ultra right-wing loons wearing tri-corner hats and pretending to be Paul Revere.

"Individual mandates still apply for 2014. Congress was also legally bound to fall under Obamacare. What does Congress do? They whine that they can't afford it. So Obama declares Congress will no longer fall under the act. You and I are forced to pay for it, but not the lords and ladies of Congress."

Congress men and -women pay taxes, so they're paying for it, too. Yet it's funny how the author wants Congress to fall under Obamacare, which would cause Congress to spend more tax dollars on the program, while, in the words above, he complains about the government spending too much money.

"The government will never voluntarily return to the limits placed on it by the Constitution, but our Founders provided a way to force them to do so. It's found in the Constitution itself, under Article V. State legislators can call for an amendment convention to take place. This is the only chance we have of saving our freedoms from the ruling class in Washington."

Just another American who has been bamboozled by right-wing propaganda to be so concerned about the government that he fails to notice corporate fascism and financial slavery, orchestrated by the ruling class on Wall Street, that is creeping up behind him. Another American so preoccupied with a mouse in the wall that he never notices the 800 lb. gorilla sitting on his couch.

I'd be curious to know just WHAT this author thinks we're supposed to do with an amendment convention? Just WHAT amendment did you have in mind? I'm reasonably certain it would be something stupid like an amendment requiring the government to keep a balanced budget every year (LOL!), but whatever it is, I'm pretty certain it involves lots of Minutemen uniforms, muskets, and tea.

Articles show failure of morality -- authored by Douglas Hoff of Clarion, Pennsylvania

"In recent newspapers I read two very disturbing articles."

What gets me about pricks like this is how they throw fits over two articles whereas I've been reading literally dozens of articles written just like the one you're about to read and no one seems to care. You'll see what I mean as you continue to read.

"The first one was in The Derrick. It reported that 21 same-sex couples filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn Pennsylvania's law which forbids homosexuals from forming a so-called marriage."

Now you know why I called this guy a prick. Forming a "so-called" marriage? No it IS a marriage. It's not "so-called." I really despise people like this who believe that love and marriage is reserved only for people the same as he is; people who are different couldn't POSSIBLY love and cherish like HE does, right? This guy is a total slimeball. So, to continue ...

"The other article was on the front page of the Clarion News proclaiming "CUP president, partner, obtain marriage license." When people in the public spotlight (like a local university president) break state law and engage in immoral behavior, their actions ought to trouble members of the community!"

No, what should REALLY trouble members of the community are guys like Mr. Hoff who a) needs to mind his own damned business b) tries to regulate the private lives of other private individuals and c) thinks he gets to decide for everyone else what is considered "immoral" behavior. Mr. Hoff is the kind of guy who you might find hidden in your bushes with a pair of binoculars and a camcorder, so watch yourself.

In addition, I can't help but think of how many oppressed minorities in this country had to break laws in order to be treated fairly. Everyone from Susan B. Anthony to Rosa Parks, many had to defy authority when authority was clearly wrong -- and make no mistake, ALL of the laws banning gay marriage in this country are not only moraly wrong, they violate the US Constitution. Of course, I wouldn't expect a damned preacher (which Mr. Hoff happens to be) to understand why and how the US Constitution trumps religion, but hey, most Christians put their religion over secular law, which is why religion is so dangerous.

"As it stands right now, Kathleen Kane, our state's attorney general, and D. Bruce Hanes, Montgomery County register of wills, have decided on their own the state's legally enacted law is un-Constitutional."

That's because it is unconstitutional. It clearly violates the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment which states that congress (including state congresses) shall pass no law with respect to the establishment of a religion. Since anti-gay laws are all about religion, the 1st Amendment is flagrantly ignored here. Just wait and you'll see why I'm correct.

"As a result, Kane has refused to enforce the law. Hanes issued 174 marriage licenses that violate state law. Fortunately, the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court ordered Hanes to cease the practice."

Too late. Kane and Hanes already achieved precisely what they set out to do -- to bring attention to an unconstitutional law so that it can be challenged. And it already is being challenged. Thank you, Kathleen Kane and D. Bruce Hanes. Thank you for having the bravery to stand up and acknowledge what thinking people around the nation have already determined. These anti-gay laws have no place in a pluralistic, non-theocratic, secular society.

"Some people have accepted the lie that society cannot legislate on moral issues."

It's not a lie. For the most part, it can't legislate on moral issues. The reason is because most moral issues are not harmful issues, and there is, in fact, a litmus test to determine if a law is needed. Just because people don't like something doesn't justify legislation -- and the lion's share of "morality" is merely a consensus of people disliking something. Which is why the next part of the article is logically ridiculous:

"I hope everyone reading this would agree murder is wrong. Suppose enough people wanted to commit murder that it became acceptable behavior to some in society. Can you imagine this ever happening?"

Well, I dunnae ... isn't that like saying, "Suppose enough people thought homosexuality was immoral enough to ban ..." I think it's rather amusing that he managed to defeat one of the most common arguments used by the anti-gay crowd, and he did it all without any help from me. If popularity isn't justifiable reason enough to enact a law, then so it is for enacting laws banning gay marriage. Oopsie!

"Well, just think back 40 years to the Supreme Court case known as Roe v. Wade. The judges at that time "found" a Constitutional right for a woman to murder her unborn child. Activist judges have been legislating from the bench for generations all the while contravening the Constitution."

Could this guy be any dumber? Okay, could he be any more hypocritical?

First of all, he complains in his first paragraph about how "disturbed" he is about gay couples trying to repeal the anti-gay laws in this state then turns around and implies that the law legalizing abortion should be overturned. Then he goes on to complain about Kathleen Kane and D. Bruce Hanes for ignoring a "legally enacted law" while crying about a "legally enacted law" (i.e. abortion) that is being enforced. Thirdly, he whinges about "activist judges legislating from the bench" while championing the anti-gay law that was created by ... you guessed it ... activist judges legislating from the bench. Finally, he wails about judges contravening the Constitution while voicing his support for anti-gay laws which violate the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.

This is the kind of flagrant stupidity people like me have to deal with on a daily basis in this country. It figures he became a preacher since most of them do nothing but spew hatred, bigotry, and intolerance. It's like what Christopher Hitchens once said: If you want to say something despicable on television, just put a "reverend" in front of your name and people will support you. I find it no small irony that America's leading atheists are British (Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, etc.)

Now, if anyone by this point still doubts me as to whether these anti-gay laws are unconstitutional because they are religious in nature, just keep reading:

"When homosexuals seek to circumvent moral law by filing a lawsuit, they have failed to go to the highest court for proper judgment. There is one lawgiver and judge they have ignored (Isaiah 33:22; James 4:12). But, do not worry. There is a day of judgment coming where everyone will stand before the throne of Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 5:10-11)"

Circumvent moral law? I think he means Biblical law ... two entirely different things. Besides, what is this, Saudi Arabia? Do we really need our morality to come from a primitive Bronze Age tome written by the fearful and the superstitious? All one has to do is visit another part of my blog, "Tally of Stupidity," to see precisely why religion is a poor guide for morality. Next thing we'll know, America will have morality police roaming our streets making sure our hair is covered, that no skin is showing, and that we do indeed have our mandatory Bible close at hand.

Truth sounds like hatred to some -- authored by Douglas Hof, Marble, Pennsylvania

"Recently I saw a post on Facebook with which I agree completely. It said, 'Truth sounds like hate to those who hate the truth.' Sadly, it seems common nowadays to accuse people of being hateful when they stand for Biblical morality."

What's worse is being called "immoral," "evil," and "sinful" when a person like myself stands for freedom. Yeah, REAL freedom, not the fascistic freedom these Biblical asshats try to sell. You know the kind of "freedom" I mean - the kind that says, "You are free to do what I tell you."

As for truth sounding like hate, well - sometimes it's just hate. Truth has nothing to do with it, and that goes double where religion is concerned. Strange how so many people keep writing to this paper trying to disavow hatred, yet, it comes across more like the lady who dost protests to much.

"Deborah Holland's Oct. 29 diatribe, "Hatred toward homosexuals dwindling" demands a response. I was falsely accused of bigotry, hatred and engaging in cowardly and shameful behavior. She is wrong on all counts."

Actually, no. The bigotry is very real, and I'll prove it in just a moment.

"I pointed out Clarion University President Karen Whitney and her partner entered into a so-called marriage which is contrary to state law. More importantly, their action is condemned by the God who created them."

The arrogance of religion never ceases to astound. Yes, MY god created YOU whether you like it or not! I won't lie or mince words. I hate religion. It's more than just an academic debate when you live in America, not when so many are actively trying to impose Christianity onto everyone regardless of what non-Christian believes they have. How can one respect THEIR religion when they have no respect for any other belief? If that respect existed, then there wouldn't BE state laws banning gay marriage because Christians wouldn't be dazzling us with Leviticus bullshit.

"The Bible calls homosexuality an abomination and against nature (Levitucus 20:13; Romans 1:26)."

Who gives a shit other than Christians? Do you think atheists care? What about Muslims? Hindus? Taoists? Buddhists? And the plethora of other religions that are practiced in America? Why should THEY have to adhere to fascistic laws because of what Leviticus says?

But here's why it's bigotry. Leviticus 20:10 ALSO says that adulterers should be put to death. Now, strange that these blathering Christians never say a peep about adulterers. In fact, there are no laws curtailing the rights of adulterers yet, taken from the very same book, God apparently hates adulterers enough to want them dead just as much as he hates gays. So where is the outcry against adulterers? Where is this "standing up for Biblical morality" that Mr. Hof bloviates about? Oh right ... it doesn't exist. So why is it, then, that there is so much vitriol written about gay marriage? Because of BIGOTRY! It doesn't take a nuclear physicist to see what's going on behind the scenes.

"I guess Holland's church may not teach the Bible at least on certain key points."

"Holland asked the rhetorical question, 'What possible impact can another's domestic relationship possibly have on your life?' The fact that all societies have laws dealing with moral issues ought to be answer enough."

No, it's NOT answer enough you blithering idiot. If you're so damned concerned about morality, why do you not cry and whinge about any OTHER type of morality besides homosexuality? Yeah, we live in a nation where men who beat the shit out of their wife can get married -- as many times as they want. Hell, even someone accused and convicted of murdering their spouse can get remarried. But holy shit! GAY marriage? Now THAT'S bad!

Anyhow, the rest of this article is nothing but a preaching extravaganza filled with Bible quotes and finger pointing at those who will be judged and who won't make it into heaven.

I'm surrounded by these primitives, like a scientists trapped on a South Pacific island surrounded by primitive savages who still worship the moon.

It's too bad "Rock On Brother" isn't here. Or even Mr. Cusick. I'd love to rub this following story in their faces.

I warned and warned and warned people that, if the fundie Christians win a victory, they'll try to grab another ... and another. They either have to be stopped or they will keep going until we are a de facto theocracy. I warned that having over 32 states successfully ban gay marriage will only encourage these idiot fundies to reach even further.

And now they have.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer is facing pressure from both sides of a heated debate over religious rights, as she weighs whether to sign a bill that would legally protect businesses that deny services to customers for religious reasons.

The bill updates existing Arizona law on the “exercise of religion” and protects businesses, corporations and people from lawsuits if they deny services based on a “sincere” religious belief.

Supporters argue the bill is about protecting religious freedom, not about allowing discrimination. And they frequently cite the case of a New Mexico photographer sued for refusing to take wedding pictures of a gay couple.

"This bill is about preventing discrimination against people who are clearly living out their faith,” said state GOP Sen. Steve Yarbrough, the bill sponsor.

[But, there is hope]

Despite some support in the state Legislature, prominent Republicans have pressed the GOP governor for a veto, including Sen. John McCain. Five of seven Republican candidates for governor also have called for the bill to be vetoed or withdrawn. The latest is Frank Riggs, a former California congressman, who said it is a "solution in search of a problem."

Like I said, I knew Christians would reach for another victory where hate triumphs over civility, and here it is. Fortunately, similar bills have been defeated in six other states, and Arizona's bill is the only one left that could still pass.

Keep in mind that this news comes from Fox News, an overtly right-leaning, Christian-loving news outlet, not some flamingly liberal site that likes to hyperbolize the evils of conservatism.

I can only hope that THIS is where the fundie Christians realize that their victories are essentially over. Reaching for more will only get their hand cut off.

Alabama’s chief justice: Buddha didn’t create us so First Amendment only protects Christians

Speaking at the Pastor for Life Luncheon, which was sponsored by Pro-Life Mississippi, Chief Justice Roy Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court declared that the First Amendment only applies to Christians because “Buddha didn’t create us, Mohammed didn’t create us, it was the God of the Holy Scriptures” who created us.

“They didn’t bring the Koran over on the pilgrim ship,” he remarked January 17 at the event in Jackson, Mississippi. “Let’s get real, let’s go back and learn our history. Let’s stop playing games.”

He then noted that he loves talking to lawyers, because he is a lawyer who went to “a secular law school,” so he knows that “in the law, [talking about God] just isn’t politically correct.” He claimed that this is why America has “lost its way,” and that he would be publishing a pamphlet “this week, maybe next” that contained copies of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, thereby proving that all the people “who found this nation — black, white, all people, all religions, all faiths” knew that America was “about God.”

Chief Justice Moore later defined “life” via Blackstone’s Law — a book that American lawyers have “sadly forgotten” — as beginning when “the baby kicks.” “Today,” he said, “our courts say it’s not alive ’til the head comes out.”

Georgia GOP candidate: ‘I’d rather see another terrorist attack’ than submit to ‘jack boot’ TSA

A Georgia Republican candidate said he would rather see another terrorist attack than submit to the “jack boot” thugs in the Transportation Security Administration.

Bob Johnson, a Savannah surgeon running in the First Congressional District GOP primary, made the remarks during a February campaign appearance, but video of the event was first reported Tuesday by Politico.

“The TSA is doing something really profound — they’re indoctrinating generations of Americans to walk through a line and be prodded and probed by uniformed personnel, agents of the government, like sheep,” Johnson said during a campaign forum in Waycross.

“Now this is going to sound outrageous,” Johnson continued. “I’d rather see another terrorist attack — truly I would — than to give up my liberty as an American citizen. Give me liberty or give me death. Isn’t that what Patrick Henry said at the founding of our Republican — or, republic?”

“People are saying, ‘Now everyone wants security before anything else. I want a perfectly safe flight,’” Johnson said. “You’re not going to have it. We’re going to have jack-boot uniformed people in our backyards.”

SD lawmaker: Gay sex is when 8 friends ‘take a dump in your bed,’ and Jesus hates it

South Dakota pastor and Republican state Rep. Steve Hickey this week defended a letter he wrote to a local paper comparing gay sex to “a one way alley for the garbage truck.”

Last week, Hickey came under fire after he posted the full text of his letter to Facebook.

The lawmaker argued that doctors should declare homosexuality dangerous because “we are talking about a one-way alley meant only for the garbage truck to go down.”

In a response written to the Argus-Leader on Monday, Democratic candidate Dr. Kevin J. Weiland explained that Hickey was “not only hurtful but entirely wrong.”

Hickey got a chance to respond during a 40-minute video interview with Argus-Leader Managing Editor Patrick Lalley later on Monday.

“There are no warnings — public health warnings — against homosexual sex,” Lalley told Hickey. “The general consensus of science is that the actual physical act is not any more dangerous [than heterosexual sex].”

****************

“I haven’t hated on anyone,” he later remarked. “I haven’t brought up the Bible once in this conversation. This policy can be made without any of that.”

But just minutes later, Hickey turned to his Christian background when Lalley pointed out that he was creating a “sense of intolerance” with his descriptions of gay sex.

“People are deluding themselves if they think, you know, God loves you and everything you’re doing,” he opined. “You know, Jesus… he was forgiving and compassionate, and he told people, you don’t be casting stones. And then he told the gal, don’t do it any more.”